Could someone explain 24P in layman's terms? at DVinfo.net

Michael Wisniewski · September 10th, 2002, 09:09 PM

In layman's terms please, what exactly does 24P do to the image? Especially in contrast to 30P?

As far as I can tell - at 24P each frame gets a slightly longer exposure vs. 30P - Is that all there really is to it or am I missing it completely?

Josh Bass · September 11th, 2002, 03:20 AM

That's what I thought--the big deal about 24p (24 frames per second) is that it emulates the framerate of film. Video to a lot people, outside of news and sports and a few other things, has a cheesy look due to its framerate. These people feel that the super fluidity of 30 fps cheapens the overall look of a production (soap operas), whereas 24 fps makes it looks more movielike, more classy (any hourlong drama in primetime). This framerate is a really big deal, and a lot of what goes towards creating the ever sought after film look. Currently, to my knowledge, only film and 24p HD cameras can shoot at 24 frames per second. Panasonic just came out with a minidv prosumer camera that can do that too. Cameras like the Canon XL1s and PD150 and I'm sure some others have what's called progressive scan, which deinterlaces the frames of video, and causes a slightly less fluid movement, making it look a tad more like 24 fps. I believe the Panasonic is the first camera in that price range to shoot at real 24 fps, though. Probably way more than you wanted to know.

Don Donatello · September 11th, 2002, 11:29 AM

"These people feel that the super fluidity of 30 fps cheapens the overall look of a production (soap operas)"

IMO the 30fps being referred to is 60i
not 30P ( progressive , frame mode)... IMO it is difficult to tell 24P and 30P apart if the camera/subject is not moving.

all NTSC video ( 24P, 30P,60i) contains 60 fields in a second ( the exact could be 59.94? 93? 96?)

Chris Hurd · September 11th, 2002, 11:43 AM

That's right, the big deal is the difference between 60i (normal NTSC) and 24p. There is really a lot of similarity between 30p and 24p. You might notice the slower flicker rate. It's impossible to perceive any difference between 25p (PAL) and 24p. But you'll notice immediately how much different 24p is from 60i.

By the way, the XL1S (and XL1, GL1, GL2 etc.) does not have progressive scan CCD's. Frame Movie mode produces the same results as progressive scan, but through different means.

In my opinion, the difference between the film and video "look" has much more to do with so many other factors. Frame rate is a major component but not the single driving element... it's also in the glass, the depth of field, the latitude (contrast ratio), many things... most importantly lighting. If you want video to look like film, then light it for film.

Josh Bass · September 11th, 2002, 11:53 AM

Sorry that's what I meant. I thought mikeysbistro was asking what the big deal with 24p was, if he was missing something by just thinking it was 24 frames a second and nothing else. Also forgot to mention that the XL1s and PD150 have a pseudo progressive scan, and not the real thing.

Chris Hurd · September 11th, 2002, 02:54 PM

Well, actually on the PD150 the progressive scan is the real thing, but unfortunately it's only 15 frames per second.

;-)

Bill Ravens · September 11th, 2002, 09:15 PM

Thanx, Chris....I was about to jump in 'til I read your response. There is SOOOOO much more to "the film look" than frame rate. I don't understand where that concept started. IMHO, lighting is indirectly one of the key factors(the direct effect is that CCD image detectors don't have the same latitude as celluloid image detectors(aka film))...and depth of field differences between 35mm lenses and 1/3" lenses.

Josh Bass · September 11th, 2002, 09:22 PM

Okay granted. I'm just saying--you can have a perfectly lit movie with brilliant sound and shallow depth of field, and that 30 fps framerate give it away as video every time.

I was at a film festival held monthly in Houston not to long ago, and someone had a movie done this way. It looked like film to me, except you could tell from the framerate that it wasn't.

There's a commercial/PSA about drunk driving or somesuch running here also, that is beautifully lit, shot and composed like film, but the fluidity of the movement easily gives it away as video. To me, if they had used some sort software or something to make it look 24 fps, it would have looked a lot classier. That's all I'm saying.

Michael Wisniewski · September 11th, 2002, 10:27 PM

Thanks everyone, I got what I wanted to know :-)

Which is basically that 24p is not something I really need to be concerned about. Just wondering because of all the hype in the media.

And now back to fine tuning that script ...

September 10th, 2002, 09:09 PM	#1
Michael Wisniewski Wrangler Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Makati, Metro Manila Posts: 2,706 Images: 32	Could someone explain 24P in layman's terms? In layman's terms please, what exactly does 24P do to the image? Especially in contrast to 30P? As far as I can tell - at 24P each frame gets a slightly longer exposure vs. 30P - Is that all there really is to it or am I missing it completely?

September 11th, 2002, 03:20 AM	#2
Josh Bass Slash Rules! Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Houston, Texas Posts: 5,472	That's what I thought--the big deal about 24p (24 frames per second) is that it emulates the framerate of film. Video to a lot people, outside of news and sports and a few other things, has a cheesy look due to its framerate. These people feel that the super fluidity of 30 fps cheapens the overall look of a production (soap operas), whereas 24 fps makes it looks more movielike, more classy (any hourlong drama in primetime). This framerate is a really big deal, and a lot of what goes towards creating the ever sought after film look. Currently, to my knowledge, only film and 24p HD cameras can shoot at 24 frames per second. Panasonic just came out with a minidv prosumer camera that can do that too. Cameras like the Canon XL1s and PD150 and I'm sure some others have what's called progressive scan, which deinterlaces the frames of video, and causes a slightly less fluid movement, making it look a tad more like 24 fps. I believe the Panasonic is the first camera in that price range to shoot at real 24 fps, though. Probably way more than you wanted to know. __________________ The Bass' camerawork The Bass on IMDB

September 11th, 2002, 11:43 AM	#4
Chris Hurd Obstreperous Rex Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: San Marcos, TX Posts: 27,368 Images: 513	That's right, the big deal is the difference between 60i (normal NTSC) and 24p. There is really a lot of similarity between 30p and 24p. You might notice the slower flicker rate. It's impossible to perceive any difference between 25p (PAL) and 24p. But you'll notice immediately how much different 24p is from 60i. By the way, the XL1S (and XL1, GL1, GL2 etc.) does not have progressive scan CCD's. Frame Movie mode produces the same results as progressive scan, but through different means. In my opinion, the difference between the film and video "look" has much more to do with so many other factors. Frame rate is a major component but not the single driving element... it's also in the glass, the depth of field, the latitude (contrast ratio), many things... most importantly lighting. If you want video to look like film, then light it for film. __________________ CH Search DV Info Net \| 20 years of DVi \| ...Tuesday is Soylent Green Day!

September 11th, 2002, 11:53 AM	#5
Josh Bass Slash Rules! Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Houston, Texas Posts: 5,472	Sorry that's what I meant. I thought mikeysbistro was asking what the big deal with 24p was, if he was missing something by just thinking it was 24 frames a second and nothing else. Also forgot to mention that the XL1s and PD150 have a pseudo progressive scan, and not the real thing. __________________ The Bass' camerawork The Bass on IMDB

September 11th, 2002, 02:54 PM	#6
Chris Hurd Obstreperous Rex Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: San Marcos, TX Posts: 27,368 Images: 513	Well, actually on the PD150 the progressive scan is the real thing, but unfortunately it's only 15 frames per second. ;-) __________________ CH Search DV Info Net \| 20 years of DVi \| ...Tuesday is Soylent Green Day!

September 11th, 2002, 11:29 AM	#3
Don Donatello Hawaiian Shirt Mogul Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: northern cailfornia Posts: 1,261	"These people feel that the super fluidity of 30 fps cheapens the overall look of a production (soap operas)" IMO the 30fps being referred to is 60i not 30P ( progressive , frame mode)... IMO it is difficult to tell 24P and 30P apart if the camera/subject is not moving. all NTSC video ( 24P, 30P,60i) contains 60 fields in a second ( the exact could be 59.94? 93? 96?)

September 11th, 2002, 09:15 PM	#7
Bill Ravens Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: santa fe, nm Posts: 3,264 Images: 10	Thanx, Chris....I was about to jump in 'til I read your response. There is SOOOOO much more to "the film look" than frame rate. I don't understand where that concept started. IMHO, lighting is indirectly one of the key factors(the direct effect is that CCD image detectors don't have the same latitude as celluloid image detectors(aka film))...and depth of field differences between 35mm lenses and 1/3" lenses.

September 11th, 2002, 09:22 PM	#8
Josh Bass Slash Rules! Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Houston, Texas Posts: 5,472	Okay granted. I'm just saying--you can have a perfectly lit movie with brilliant sound and shallow depth of field, and that 30 fps framerate give it away as video every time. I was at a film festival held monthly in Houston not to long ago, and someone had a movie done this way. It looked like film to me, except you could tell from the framerate that it wasn't. There's a commercial/PSA about drunk driving or somesuch running here also, that is beautifully lit, shot and composed like film, but the fluidity of the movement easily gives it away as video. To me, if they had used some sort software or something to make it look 24 fps, it would have looked a lot classier. That's all I'm saying. __________________ The Bass' camerawork The Bass on IMDB

September 11th, 2002, 10:27 PM	#9
Michael Wisniewski Wrangler Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Makati, Metro Manila Posts: 2,706 Images: 32	Thanks everyone, I got what I wanted to know :-) Which is basically that 24p is not something I really need to be concerned about. Just wondering because of all the hype in the media. And now back to fine tuning that script ...